tv Tonight From Washington CSPAN January 24, 2013 8:00pm-11:00pm EST
the senate will be in order so the majority leader can be heard. without objection. mr. reid: mr. president, could we have people stop talking? the president pro tempore: i ask senators to please cooperate so the majority leader can be heard. if the conversations in the well and throughout the senate could cease. the majority leader. mr. reid: we're going to have one more vote tonight. the next vote will be on sandy and matters related to sandy monday night at 5:30. we expect -- i have spoken to the chairman, new chairman of the -- will soon be the chair of the foreign relations committee, and ranking member corker. we're going to have a vote after the business meeting sometime on
the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to a period of morning business, senators allowed to speak for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. reid: i now ask unanimous consent that at 4:30 p.m. monday, january 28, the senate proceed to the consideration of h.r. 152, the supplemental appropriations bill to provide disaster assistance for hurricane sandy, that the only only amendment in order to the
bill be a lee amendment, the text of which is at the desk, that there be an hour of debate on the amendment and the bill to run concurrently equally divided between the two leaders or their designees. prior to a vote in relation to the lee amendment. upon disposition of the lee amendment, the senate proceed to vote on passage of the bill as amended if amended. that the lee amendment and the bill be subject to a 60-vote affirmative vote throashed. finally, that no other amendments be in order. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. reid: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to s. res. 17. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 17, to constitute the majority party's membership on certain committees for the 113th congress or until their successors are chosen. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. reid: thank you, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, there being no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to consideration of s. res. 18. the presiding officer: the clerk
will report. the clerk: senate resolution 18, making minority party appointments for the 113th congress. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. reid: i now ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, there being no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. reid: mr. president, h.r. 325 has been received from the house and is at the desk. i would ask the clerk to read this matter if the president so advises. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the title of the bill for the first time. the clerk: h.r. 325, an act to assure the complete and timely payment of the obligations of the united states government until may 19, 2013, and for other purposes. mr. reid: i would ask for a second reading but object to my own request. the presiding officer: objection is heard. the bill will be read for the second time on the next legislative day. mr. reid: mr. president, i now ask unanimous consent that the
appointments at the desk appear separately in the record as if made by the chair. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. reid: i now ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 2:00 p.m. on monday, january 28. that following the prayer and pledge, the morning business be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the senate proceed to a period of morning business until 4:30 p.m., that senators be permitted to speak during that period of time for up to ten minutes. further, following morning business, the senate proceed to h.r. 152 under the previous order. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. reid: there will be two roll call votes at 5:30 p.m. on monday to comete action on hurricane sandy. if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it adjourn under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until senate stands adjourned until
without getting into the nitty-gritty, what does this mean for the senate? >> it means harry reid can get onto those much quicker. it's one of the can thursday raised with republican obstruction at the beginning of the debate and also other changes as well such as movie into conference negotiations with the house after the senate has passed legislation. recent changes to lower tiered nominations both on the judicial site as well as executive side, preventing what is seen as extremely dilatory tactics in certain situations. overall it does not eliminate the filibuster. republicans are anyone can filibuster when they i want, boat would read has been mostly concerned about is the pervasive use of dilatory tag eggs when the senate has expressed its will and shown extreme
willingness in virtually vast majority of folks to move forward. the situations will be reduced in the future and he sees this as an opportunity to ease the gridlock pervasive in the senate over the last several years. >> why would mitch mcconnell agreed to limit his possibility to soto's assertion? what you get out of it? >> one concession is they have at least two amendments taken off her on the floor. republicans say the reason for the gridlock has agreed himself. he's been blocking amendment like no other leader has before him and they were willing to go on to something someone if they have her ability to offer amendments on the floor. this would only work in situations which they agree to see their beginning of the debate and go immediately forward to bring a bill directly to the fly without procedural
votes. they would need to be some bipartisan compromise in order for republicans to a chance to offer. the republicans now there would be some changes. reid was threatening to change all the rules and go much further with the 51 vote majority. that's the nuclear option because it would circumvent the usual way, which is 57 votes. , have much less leverage than read, so we got a lot of what he wanted to find a package. >> harry reid and mitch mcconnell had an agreement that bert work cooperatively with each other and restrained use of the filibuster, but that only lasts a short time. what are the prospects and current agreement to work effectively going forward? >> they did not change with that
situation. in this situation they are. some will only last for this congress and from permanent changes to the rule. that is one aspect. this is a sign that, if you're our kind please in terms of the rules. senator can block legislation still. but, when read, a lot of leeway to show the obstruction inside. it will change much at all. they can make things worse in some ways. it remains to be seen how much different the senate will be in a combat they're still going to be a slow-moving body and will be difficult to get legislation through. >> i appreciate your time. >> thank you.
>> what's the best training for a policeman? >> the best training you can get to be coming to police officer and understand what it's all about is on the street. i will say that till the day i die. you learn how to develop sources, use intelligence information. you learn how to leverage relationships. people in the community trustee. they'll tell you when things are happening that are not yet signed so you can intervene and tell you all about how to go about doing it. i learned most of my career from
those relationships. i >> defense secretary lampkin not an chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, martin dempsey moved to allow my men to serve in combat. mr. panetta said while everyone will not be a combat soldier, everyone is entitled to the chance. this is 40 minutes. >> good afternoon. one of my priorities as secretary of defense has been to remove as many barriers as possible for talented and qualified people to be able to serve this country in uniform. our nation was built on the
premise of the citizen soldier and our democracy i believe it is the responsibility of every citizen to protect the nation and every citizen who can meet the qualifications of survey should have that opportunity. to that end, i've been working closely with general dempsey and the joint chiefs of staff who been working for well over a year to examine how could we expand the opportunities of women in the armed services. it's clear to all of us that women are contributing in unprecedented ways to the military's mission of defending the nation. women represent 15% of the force, over 200,000.
were serving in a growing number of critical roles on and off the battlefield. the fact is that they have become an integral part of our ability to perform our mission. for more than a decade of war, they've demonstrated courage, skill and pastry to some. 152 women in uniform have died serving this nation. in iraq and afghanistan. female service members have faced the reality of combat, proven their willingness to say and died to defend their fellow americans. however, many military positions, particularly in ground combat units still remain
close to women because of the night to 94 direct ground combat definition and assignment rule. military and civilian leaders of the superman had been taken a hard look above rule based on the experiences of the last decade. in early 2012, we announced a series of modifications to that rule, which opened up more than 14,000 new positions to women, including positions that are co-located with ground combat units in certain positions in ground combat units below the battalion level. these changes have been implemented in the experience has been very positive. every time i visited the war zone, every time i've met with
troops, reviewed military operations and talk to wounded warriors, i've been impressed with the fact that everyone, men and women alike, everyone is committed to doing the job. they're fighting them there dying together and the time has come for our policies to recognize that reality. the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and i believe that we must open up service opportunities for women as fully as possible and therefore today, general dempsey and i are pleased to announce that we are eliminating the direct ground combat exclusion rule for women
the way are moving forward with a plan to eliminate all unnecessary gender-based barriers. in a few moments after we speak, we will both sign a memo that will resend the 94 barrier. our purpose is to ensure that the mission is carried out by the best qualified in the most capable servicemembers regardless of gender and regardless of creed and beliefs. if members of our military can meet the qualifications for a job, and let me be clear, not talking about reducing qualifications for the job. if they can make qualifications for the job, then they should have the right to serve regardless of creed or color, gender or orientation.
having conducted an extensive review, the joint chiefs of staff has developed a thoughtful approach to integrating women into occupations across the force. i strongly agree with their guiding principles in the specific milestones they propose. we are all committed to implementing this change without compromising readiness or morale or were fighting capabilities. positions will be open to women following service reviews. using the joint chiefs guiding principles and following congressional notification procedures established by law. but this change in policy to succeed, it must be done in a responsible, measured and coherent way. i would general dempsey describe her plan of action in greater
detail. the bottom line is further integration of women will occur expeditiously. even as we recognize the need to institutionalize changes of this importance. the steps we announced today are significant. in many ways they are an affirmation of where we been having a state department for more than 10 years. nevertheless, it will take leadership and professionalism to effectively implement these changes. i am confident in our ability to do that because i am confident in the leadership that general dempsey in the joint chiefs of staff have demonstrated throughout this process. this has truly been a team effort and i deeply admire the
extremely arrowing considerate approach they've taken. i want to express my deepest thanks to marty dempsey for his leadership in all the service chiefs who have been working on this issue and as a group, came forward with the recommendation we are implementing today. our men and women in uniform have not asked for more than a leaders in uniform. i fundamentally believe our military is more effective and success is based solely on ability and qualifications and performance. when i look at my grandson and my granddaughters, i've got six grandchildren, three grandsons and three granddaughters, i want each of them to have the same
chance to succeed at whatever they want to deal. life as we are now, there are no guarantees to success. not everyone is going to be able to be a combat soldier. the everyone is entitled. by committing ourselves to that principle, we are renewing our commitment to the american values are servicemembers stay and die to defend. as secretary, i go to bethesda to visit wounded warriors to bury our dead there is no distinction that's made between the sacrifices of men and women
in uniform. they served their wended and a guy right next to each other. the time has come to recognize that reality. by opening up more opportunities for people to serve in uniform, we are making our military stronger and we are making america stronger. we honor, we deeply honor all of those past generations. combat soldiers and marines who fought and died for freedom. in many ways, their sacrifice has ensured that the next greatest generation will be one of men and women who will fight and die together to protect this
nation. that is what freedom is all about. >> thank you, mr. secretary. today we are acting to expand opportunities for women to serve in the united states armed forces and better align our policy is with the experiences we've had over the past decade of work. ultimately we are acting to strengthen the joint force. congress acted first by legislating that women became a permanent part of the armed forces. blaster is the secretary mentioned we acted to open thousands of mission essential occupations that were echelons and in more units. after months of work, we recently submitted to the secretary are unanimous recommendation to resend the rule and so we are acting to
eliminate all unnecessary gender-based barriers to service. the joint chief share, cause on the need start this now and to do it right. were committed to a purposeful and principled approach, specifically to extend opportunities to women in a way that maintains readiness, morale and unit cohesion. we'll preserve our war fighting capability to defend the nation will uphold the trust and confidence of the american people as we go forward. our nation demands no less. but integrate women in a way that enhances opportunity for a run. setting clear standards of performance for all occupations based on what it takes to do the job. it means ensuring standards are gender-neutral and occupations open to women. as we open to close a occupations we must make sure
there's a sufficient number of females entering the career field already assigned to the related commands and leadership to sustain success of her time. our service women and men deserve no less. these principles will guide the work ahead. services and special operations command will expand the number of unit and women assigned to those units this year. they will continue to assess, develop and validate general neutral standard civic and start assigning personnel to previously closed occupations and take the time needed to do the work without compromising the principles i just just mentioned. in fact, adherence to the principles may lead to an assessment that some should remain exceptional. in such cases they will bear the responsibility for providing
what is best for the joint force in the women who serve in it. at the same time, women will serve at distinction throughout armed forces in and out of combat on land and not see clearly outweigh are the same uniform and fight the same weapons and most importantly we all take the same old. thank you. the secretary and i will now send the document. [applause] >> okay, now onward. go ahead.
>> mr. chairman, based on that experience, a little bit about what you think is realistic as you know that the next couple of years, as you consider the physical demands of some of the jobs, do you expect it shall ever see anywhere near 100% of jobs open? what are the realistic expectations that you have based on what you've learned over the past year? mr. secretary, if you want to address that also in a separate issue north korea has announced a third nuclear test. can you talk about what if any u.s. military preparations are precautions may be needed over the next several weeks to prepare for that and to react to it and what if any initials types may be taken. >> to answer the question of what i see happening, let me be clear what was done. with the exclusion of place, i
saw a ticker on a network is the women about to be allowed to serve in combat. we are way beyond that and that's part of the point that women are serving in combat and had then. in 2003 when i got to baghdad, my first foray out of the operating base i hopped into the armored humvee and asked the driver who he was and where he was from and i said who are you? should lay down its enemy and in that. i said okay. so if the macabre protection division commander. from that point on i realized something had changed and it is time to do something about it. what was done i eliminated the direct combat exclusion provision, the burden used to be that we would say why should a woman serving a particular special? now with his wife shouldn't a
woman. the services now have the opportunity to take with that now is the reverse paradigm to come out over time with careful analysis and make sure because standards right before going to keep him close, explain my and i think there'll be the right amount of scrutiny on that. fundamentally, you always have to be the most ready for certain possibly be. i don't know how well that's going to sort out, but is eager to begin the journey. >> just to emphasize that point, one thing i've been struck by an almost 50 years since i served in the military, to go out now in d.c. women women performing the roles and doing a great job
at it, i think it just has encouraged me and encouraged all of this that everybody should have a chance to be able to perform at any mission. if they can meet the qualifications. i think marty and i have been talking and looking at this issue for a while now, but we both feel what we are seeing in men and women in uniform are just testing individuals who make a contribution to this country and are willing to put their lives on the line. if they wind up with their lives the line, we have to recognize they deserve a chance to serve in any capacity they want. with regards to north korea, we are very concerned with north
korea's continuing provocative behavior. but they said in the last few days has been needlessly provocative. if they go forward with the kind of tests are talking about, and again represents a violation of the u.n. security resolutions in violation of international law. we've made very clear to the north koreans we have a choice. we have a choice between trying to become a member of the international family by negotiating a way to resolve the issues that concern the international community and try to do what they can to improve the status of their people or to engage in this kind of
provocative behavior, which in the end will do nothing, nothing other than jeopardize the hope for peace. we are fully prepared. we remain prepared to deal with any kind of provocation from the north koreans. i hope in the end that they determined it is better to make a choice to become part of the international campaign. adding a mac >> and now, i certainly continue to follow the intelligence closely. we've seen no outward indications, but that doesn't tell you much. they have the capability frankly to conduct these tests in a way that make it very difficult to determine whether or not they are doing it. >> could you put in to the
policy change with the great policy changes this institution faced in 1948 with the integration of virtual integration, all volunteer army, and the "don't ask, don't tell." would this be a challenging, less challenging because of those major shifts? would our realistic as this is not on autopilot, is that? ending is going to be hurdles to overcome. >> sure. that's why you see some of the time intervals we asked for and the secretary has given us. one of the things we want to make sure we do, tony, as we talk about the lessons of the last 10 years of work. i want to make sure we don't learn the wrong lessons. what i mean by that is the warfare were involved in now is based on operating bases. you're generally bad for.
sometimes every day you come back to the days where you have the mess hall, housing unit and shower units and so forth. one of the things we want to do with the time the secretary has given us is make sure the standards were developed and accepted measure our standards that apply in any particular conflict, not just one kind of conflict. so the answer to your question is that's why we've asked for the time, to make sure we got the standards right to anyone who can meet the standard will be eligible to serve in that particular occupation skill. >> what are the major road docs in the next year or two? >> in this country, as the president himself pointed out in his inaugural speech, we've been on a long journey towards achieving the quality and very
thin contest challenges along the road and facing every barrier, whether it was racial barriers, the "don't ask, don't tell", dealing with women. all of these have not come easy. they required a lot of sacrifice, a lot of work, a lot of dedication, a lot of leadership. that would be the case here. we have the experience of women in service. you see them in combat as general dempsey pointed out. i think it gives us a head start. i feel very confident we can make this work. [inaudible]
>> the answer to that question is the issue of standards. different kinds of warfare if you think of the difference between counterinsurgency in the korean peninsula, very different environment, so we want to make sure we get the standards right, that we don't overengineer that either, that they are fair. and then we want to allow individuals to compete for this position. >> physical standards? >> not just physical standards. the standards we have for these military occupations generally could include everything from mental standards to physical standards.
the physical standards tend to be the ones people focus on. we figured out privacy right from the start. by the way, desert storm, desert shield 1991, we did live in that kind of environment where we were essentially somewhat nomadic in saudi arabia eventually iraq we figured out privacy. >> the fact is that was one of the concerns at the time, but the fact is that they have rejiggered to be able to adapt to that kind of situation. women are fighter pilots now. so air force, navy has lived in that direction. the marines and the army obviously you're going to live in the same direction. there will have to be some adjustments in some situations,
but again, based on the experience we already have, i think we can meet those challenges. [inaudible] it sounds like there may be certain combat operational soirées that women might be excluded from still appear but would be the reasons for that? what sorts of operations? >> requirements for a spectrum conflict, not just counterinsurgency, we really need to have standards that apply for a period importantly if we do decide a particular standard is so high that woman couldn't make it, the burden is now on the service to explain why is it that high? with the direct combat exclusion provision, we never had to have
that conversation. >> whether women's mayfield to certain special operations are those such as navy seals. >> when you look back at what i said since i was chief of staff of the army as general odierno has had come in general amos has had, we believe there would be women who can eat the standards. the other part of the equation is to account for their safety and success in this kind of units we've got to have enough of them said they have mentors and leaders about them. you would want one woman and put her in a particular unit. the issue there would be privacy. it would be, where is her ability to have upward mobility to compete for command issues one of one. we have to work the standards and the critical mass at the will to make this work. but that's our commitment.
by the way, that's why nasa services to provide a plan that would be presented in may of this year, that would point out exactly how this is to be implemented. elisabeth. >> can you talk about about president obama's big moment in your discussions and how much he was involved? >> marty and i had the opportunity to meet with the president usually every week depending on his schedule to go over issues and over the past year, i've regularly briefed the president on this issue we had open up two positions and providing even more opportunities and he was very supportive. if i occurred, he was supportive and always encouraged us to ensure everything we did at the
force better and insured readiness. he is alert to the fact that the end of the day the armed forces has to be ready. >> earlier, you said it was or is traveling around -- >> that's correct. >> while, at the cia, i can tell you we are at a point where close to 50% of the people working there. so it was for me really reassuring to see young men and women were equally dedicated to the intelligence services in coming to the army have been the opportunity to see that firsthand was again something that for me was a very special
experience because i thought, you know, america stands for giving young people those kinds of opportunities. if they can do the job, if they can meet the standards, if they can make qualifications involved here, there is a reason why they should have a chance. fascisti fundamental belief of mine and it's a fundamental belief that the american people. >> today as i'm sure you know the british, french and the dutch are point citizens under benghazi sandhurst eminent threat. the first question is commercial air has been counseled out golfing until next week. if the u.s. going to help get citizens out? and because you certainly would want civilians to know what they face, what is the imminent threat in benghazi? effectively on algeria, can you update us on your assessment as
to who may have been responsible? do you now view belmokhtar and aqim have rejoined forces in their involvement of libya's fighters and weapons as secretary clinton said yesterday? can you bring us up to date on your thinking? >> yeah, and benghazi it's no mystery that it's a dangerous situation there and, you know, everybody in that area i think is very concerned that they simply can't provide the security necessary to protect people in those places and i think that's why these countries have made the decision they've made. as far as i know, we have not been asked to participate in moving any people out of benghazi. >> all pick up the rest of the
question on who is doing what to do over there. the way to think about the north african, west african is a syndicate of groups who come together episodically when it's convenient to them in order to advance their cause. sometimes it's terrorism, criminal, sometimes trafficking. i'll just name for groups. so it isn't libya, ansar al-sharia, in algeria, ansar al-din, in mali, it's aqim, so there is -- there is the opinion is mokhtar belmokhtar's group, they work together when it is convenient to them and what we have to be alert to us as we look at these individual groups or individual countries, we have to abolish the connect it to sugar and that takes us to a
regional strategy. a q. and did take credit place their. we still at this moment have not been able to look at the specifics involved. we understand the algerians are questioning two individuals that they were able to capture during this operation. so we're hoping we'll get better information from them specifically at who is involved. >> if i could quickly follow up, you and the president had said he would go after the perpetrators. but how do you do that in north africa when you have this makes the general dempsey's
describing? with respect, can you still promise that you are get these perpetrators of these two incidents that killed americans? >> i assure you barbara what i find out who the perpetrators were work a lot for them. that'll be the first challenge to find out who is precisely involved. americans were killed and we don't stand by when americans are killed and not take action. >> without the u.s. military responsibilities or civilian line for that, fbi? >> will take whatever action is necessary to go after these people. >> mr. secretary, thank you. he said that this decision will make the military stronger. there will be an art critic so that premise. can you give us examples of how putting women in the military will make her campaign forces stronger? >> let me not limited to
military. and they give you two observations. one is that graduated from west point in the team 74. it was in on the institution. i came back in 1976 to get married and watch the first class, they were pleased at the time. i watched the first class of women entered a wonderful would that be like. i'm back to teach at west point in 1884 and from the academy of far better place than when i was a cadet. i don't have time to explain why, but it had become better in almost every way, academically and physically, politically, just a better place. and i attribute a good bit of that to the fact we open up the academy to women. secondly, we've had this ongoing issue was harassed and, also. i believe it's because we've had separate classes of military personnel at some level.
it's far more complicated than not, but when you one part of the population designated as warriors in another part designated as something else, that disparity begins to establish a psychology that in some cases led to that environment. i happen to believe the more we treat people equally, the more likely they are to treat each other equally. >> what positions are actually been opened up? is coming back to changing the selective service requirements to young women and 18, if we were to reintroduce the draft, is it safe to say that this was essentially are due to push forward changes? >> you know, when it comes to an issue like this, this is really a team effort.
marty dempsey in the joint chiefs and i have the opportunity to meet almost every other week in the tank and i'll swear to talk about these issues. opening up opportunities for men and women in the military has always been something that we've talked about. they expressed an interest. i expressed an interest only both work together to ensure we take steps to do that. general dempsey and i looked at each other and i said look, we both know that we want to be able to open these opportunities up, but i want to make sure that you and the military really are the ones who are the movers with regards to this idea because they've got to support it. they've got to back it up and to
their credit and came forward with the recommendations and i was pleased when i got that recommendation of what we've talked about. with regard to selective service, that's not our operations. i don't know who controls selective service if you want to know the truth. whoever does is going to have to exercise in what they did. >> what specialties will open today? none. we need time to sort it out. >> thank you.
>> senator kerry talked about iran's nuclear program. iu can see a hearing in its entirety on c-span.org. >> president has made it definitive. we will do what we must do to prevent durand from obtaining a nuclear weapon and i repeat her today, our policy is not containment. it is prevention and the clock e is ticking on our efforts to secure responsible compliance. this administration working witt congress in an unprecedented coalition has put into place crippling sanctions on iran. mr. chairman, you've been a leader not a third and i know will continue to be. president obama has stated again t again and i want to emphasize this, he and i prefer a diplomatic resolution to this
>> personal-finance has been no start in 1930s with sylvia porter and is a spinoff of the 1930s. the 1930s are not from everything from hard economic times you see everything from alcoholics anonymous in the 1930s to nepal and thinking how they reached a very social activist movement. you know fascism, communism has a huge appeal. sylvia porter develops finance over a period of years and her goal is to educate people so the great depression will never happen again. but it's very much in a buy of its time an idea we can teach people certain skills and if they learn the skills will all be okay.
>> california senator dianne feinstein proposed legislation today that would then so-called assault weapons and ammunition magazines with more than 10 rounds. she was joined by other members of congress as well as police officers and mayors around the country. this is a little more than an hour. >> i want to thank all of you for coming today and i really want to welcome you. i am pleased to be joined this morning by a cross-section of americans who have been affected by gun violence. we have with us today police chiefs, mayors, teachers,.yours,
members of the clergy, mothers, gun safety groups, victims of gun violence and others who care deeply about the issue. i'd really like to thank my colleagues in the senate and in the house who have chosen to stand together on this important issue. some of us have been working to provide violence for decades. together we are introducing legislation to help end the mass shootings at devastated countless families and terrorized communities. today you'll hear from some of my colleagues in the senate. senator dick durbin from illinois, part of the leadership of the democratic side. senator chuck schumer from new york who helped me immeasurably in 1993 by headlining or i should say leading the effort in the house of representatives, which was successful.
senator richard blumenthal and chris murphy, distinguished senators from connecticut who know firsthand about assault weapons. you will also hear from congresswoman carolyn mccarthy from new york who knows firsthand the devastation of gun violence as well as congressman ed perlmutter of colorado, who represents aurora and congressman -- congresswoman elizabeth sp who represents newton. you'll hear from mayor michael nutter from philadelphia who leads the united states conference of mayors. you hear from commissioner charles ramsey of the philadelphia police department, the current president of the major cities, police chiefs in association who will speak about the display of weapons you see to my left. finally, we will hear from the dems a reset not shootings. i'd also like to recognize other
supporters here today. on the risers behind the we have police officers from several department and i so thank you for joining us today. hot mark i would also like to recognize the million moms for gun control who are represented by mrs. sandburg today, doctors for america, the american academy of pediatrics and the american federation of teachers. now i'd like to introduce reverend jerry hall, dean of the national cathedral to open this morning with a few remarks and a prayer. >> thank you, senator feinstein. it's an honor to be here today with you and sharing the work that you and your colleagues and
faith united against gun violence are doing. i spoke in praise at the washington national cathedral on gun violence and i've done it on the pulpit and in the media and conversations at readers and people in my own church. now we've come to the end of the preaching part and we are moving forward today with tangible solutions to the epidemic as we stand with senator find time in her congressional colleagues as they introduce this assault weapons ban. if people of faith we have the moral obligation to stand for the victims of gun violence at work to admit. but tolerated school shootings in mall shooting in theater shooting and workplace shooting in temple in church shooting an urban neighborhood shooting for far too long. enough is enough. everyone in the city seems to live in terror of the gun laws.
i believe the gun lobby is no match for the cross body, especially when they stand together as people of all faiths across the landscape of america. i don't want to take away someone's hunting rifle, but i can no longer justify a society that allows military and police while weapons like these are that permits the sale of high-capacity magazines designed with the purpose of killing as many people as quickly as possible. on behalf of all my interface colleagues whom i stand here and represent today, i ask you join me now in a brief moment of prayer as we come together around is consensual, middle of the road comments in the collections for those today. let us pray. god you've made human beings in
your image and giving us heart with which to feel the pain of others and minds to create solutions for human suffering. give us as a people passion and vision to respond to the crisis of gun violence not only with words, that action. bless our elected leaders of the wisdom and courage needed to bring about changes that people demand and granted in so doing our streets and classrooms and theaters and churches may be peaceful and safe. we ask all this in god's holy name, amen. >> thank you very much, reverend hall. psychology today, i remain horrified by the mass murders committed at san he hoped -- sandy hook and i'm grateful we
have both senators here in the house underrepresented that community. i'm also been sent there because the levees mass killings to be carried out again and again and again in our country. weapons designed originally for the military to kill large numbers of people in close combat are replicated for civilian use. they fall into the hands one way or another of grievance killers, gangs, those who are mentally unstable or ill. they are sold out of trunks and back seats of automobiles in cities as well as gun shows with no questions asked. massacres have taken place in law practices, malls, movie theaters and especially schools. these massacres don't seem to stop. they continue on.
columbine, virginia tech, aurora, tucson, oak creek. the common thread in the shooting is each gunman used a semi automatic assault weapon or large capacity ammunition magazines. military style assault weapons have but one purpose and in my view that's a military purpose to hold at the hippest possible, to spray fire, to kill large numbers. since the last assault weapons ban expired in 2004 and incidentally in the 10 years it was in place, no one took it to court. more than 350 people have been killed with assault weapons. more than 450 have been injured. we should be outraged by how easy it is for perpetrators of these horrific crimes to obtain
powerful military style weapons. today my colleagues and i are introducing the bill to prohibit the sale transfer, manufacture and importation of assault weapon and large capacity ammunition devices that can accept more than 10 rounds. let me briefly describe the legislation we're introducing. we prohibit 158 specifically named military style firearms. since the 1994 law expired, there's been an influx of new models of assault weapons. these models are more powerful, more lethal and type illogically advanced than the weapons in 1993. our bill also prohibits other semi-pneumatic rifles, handguns and shotguns that can accept a
detachable magazine and have one military coup to restate. one criticism of the 94 law was that a mistake to curt research test bed to find it and i was too easy to work around. manufacturers simply remove one of the carrot touristic centerfire weslaco. the bill reintroduced today will make it much more difficult to work around by moving the one characteristic tests. the bill also prevents the prohibits specific loopholes such as the slide iron stop, which can be added to an error 15, which essentially makes that mimic automatic weapon and is legal. some bullet that several
>> in an event that the weapon is sold or transferred. so we have tried to learn from the bill. we have tried to recognize legal hunting rights we have tried to recognize the rights of the citizens to legally possess a the purpose is to dry up the supply of these weapons over time. therefore, there is no sunset on this bill. i would like now to interviews, in my view, a wonderful woman. she is our lead house cosponsor.
the distinguished representative from the great state of new york, carolyn mccarthy. [applause] >> thank you very much. you would think after all these years of being in congress and fighting for this issue, but i wouldn't be nervous standing here in front of all of you. it has been a very lonely battle for many years. and i think a lot of the victims that are out there, a lot of the groups that have been fighting for so long, probably felt that way. but when you look over here and senator dianne feinstein and came because of gun violence that she witnessed, senator schumer that took the lead when i was in congress doing all the work to get the first assault weapons bill done.
the mayors and police chiefs and everybody behind me. all of you. you know, a lot of words can be said and i've got a great speaker. i staff work on it a long time. and i'm probably going to do what they always tell me not to do. let me just speak from my heart. i have watched so many people and i have met with so many victims over the years. in congress, nobody wanted to touch the issue. the last several years, the massacres were going on more than one. i kept saying what is wrong with all of us. how many people have to be killed before we do something?
i thought for sure that after virginia tech, that we would get something done. then over, colorado, happened. and then something happened in newtown, connecticut. the people of america said how could this happen? how could this happen to our children? over the last few weeks, as we try to define how we can work together, it has been frustrating, but i still have great hope. to be honest with you, i do not trust them to be there for the tough votes. that is why all of us in the
president, by the way, the vice president, president vice president biden, and those of us are fighting for this are going to spread the word to the corners of the country. nra members have been speaking out to get something done. these are good law-abiding citizens who want to hunt. they want to go duck hunting. and the guns that they use only allow three bullets. deer hunting depending on what state you are in allow five bullets. most hunters will tell you if you don't get it on the first try, you probably won't get it on the second one. yet we have these machines. we have a large magazines. they can take down 20 children in seconds.
the only reason is that our first responders were there and the killer ended up taking his own life. some people will say that it still won't work. let me tell you why it will work. because if you don't have these guns and the large magazines on the shelves, they have done a terrific killings and wouldn't be able to go into a gun store and just buy them. they don't have the background to go and look to wear where the black market is to be able to buy these magazines and guns think of the lives that could be saved. a lot of people in this audience whose families have gone through
losing a child, a killing killing and their family, losing a husband or wife -- they were single killings. we must do something to stop that also. this is only the beginning. we are going to be working on an approach and looking at how we can help our young people. so that they don't go into the world of drugs. we should be helping those children that have psychological problems, so that they don't feel that they have to take a gun to even commit suicide or take down some of their classmates. you are going to hear from some that it cannot be done. i am telling you that it can be done. i am telling you with all my heart and soul that it can be
done. but we, as the president has said, the people -- we have to make those decisions. newtown, connecticut, made a difference. the killings there made us look up into ourselves and say why can't we do something about that. i am telling you that between the battle between now and then, you're going to hear from nra for an awful long time. i'm saying that we can save lives. since newtown, connecticut, just about 1000 people have died from guns. 1000 people. those children and their dreams
area the dreams of those who have died out of violence never to be the bill. the day that that incident happens, i was actually giving an interview and it was just a filing of how i get through the holidays. and she said to me, do you have the tv on, and that was the beginning of my nightmare again. as it is for every victim that has to go through it every single time we hear of the killing. it has to stop. it has to stop. we can make a difference and we can save thousands and thousands of lives. i would be remiss if i did not say that those who have survived those horrific shootings, as my son did so many years ago, our
lives will never be the same. and how much it has cost this country on health care to take care of the victims. that is what this country is facing and we have to look at each other and say yes, we can do this. we will do the right thing. our police officers will do the right thing. but if the american people don't stand up for the lies that are being said that we can't do anything about gun violence, who loses? the future of our children. they are the ones that lose. we can do this, please, be there for us. thank you. [applause] >> that was super.
i would like to introduce the senators who are now going to be speaking, and i will introduce them at one time and then they will follow one another. senator durbin is part of the democratic leadership. he has spent a great deal of time as a champion for the cause over many years. he is also a member of the judiciary committee to which this bill will go. senator chuck schumer knows this issue backwards and forwards. he also is a member of the judiciary committee. and connecticut senators richard blumenthal and chris murphy who have been so diligent and comforting to the families of the victims of newtown, connecticut. senator blumenthal is also a member of the judiciary committee. gentlemen, if you would come forward. thank you. >> thank you, senator feinstein. i want to thank you for your steadfast commitment to this issue over the years.
i would like to thank my colleague and friend, senator schumer, for the same. and also carolyn mccarthy, your words touched our hearts in so many ways. so many victims stand and fight for change. she did more than speak out, she ran for office to make sure that her voice was heard in the halls of congress. i also want to thank those who are here today, particularly law enforcement. we cannot do this without you. we need to have your validation of what we are setting out to do. and also so many others. families and victims who are stepping up now. because this is not just an issue of constitution but an issue of conscience. we have one basic question that is being asked which i hope we can answer. what does it take? what does it take to move the
nation? what does it take to the congress? we know about the thousands of victims of gun violence and we certainly know that not that long ago there was a tragedy in arizona where one of our own at a town meeting was shot point-blank in the face. and others were killed in that same location. even that incident did not move us to act. what does it take? it took 20 children and six others showing extraordinary courage to risk their lives and try to save and protect the same children. it was the image of those children that each and every one of us look back and said, that could be my son or daughter. that could be my grandson or granddaughter. and it made a difference. it was the tipping point in this
national conversation. i will never forget when dick blumenthal came back to tell us firsthand what they saw. what they saw in newtown, connecticut. he talked about standing in the building opposite side appearance as they brought the children out of the school and parents would rush to grab the babies and hug them. at the end of the day they were 20 parents standing alone. that is what it took. the question is what we do about it? what can we do about it? we can only do as much as the american people help us do. we need to have their support. science cannot win this issue. we have to speak out. in the month after newtown,
connecticut 126 innocent lives were lost, the semi automatic weapons and a person who never should have owned it. we had over 26 people killed on the streets of the city of chicago, victims of gun violence and the tragedy continues to repeat itself. i met with the police chief and talked about this and he brought with him a piece of evidence like you will see here. the night before it had been used in the streets of chicago. thank goodness a jam after one round and nobody was hurt or killed. but that is what this debate is about. let me close by saying that there is another group in this conversation. we need responsible hunters and sportsmen to step up. i grew up in this tradition in illinois. there are plenty who value this
is part of the american tradition. they store their guns safely and responsibly and comply with every aspect. and they shake their heads when they hear the guy marty speak for them. they don't need a weapon to go out to target practice. we need them to set up and we need their voice is part of the conversation. the critics say that that is the lawful stop all this. okay, but if it can save a life was spared tragedy, it is certainly worth our support and effort. [applause] >> thank you. thank you senator durbin for your eloquent words.
i would like to thank my friends and colleagues, particularly senator feinstein. she has been indomitable in this issue. i will never forget that we talked about this probably every month is the ban expired about how we can get it done. the fact that she is leaving this issue gives us a lot of faith and i would like to say just a word about carolyn mccarthy who goes to bed every night thinking about what happened to her family. she lives a candle instead of cursing the darkness. as you know, we have a long history of working to pass this bill, which included the original assault weapons ban. the crime bill made an incredible bands in criminal violence that was plaguing our
country. the successful been of some assault weapons was a key part of that. now, times have changed and so have the capabilities of those who would do us harm. so i applaud senator feinstein for drafting a smart and more robust version of these assault weapons ban, which he has outlined. assault weapons were designed for and should be used on our battlefields. not on our streets. some do not get that. you know, we can have a rational discussion about bills like this. heller decision said that there is a second amendment right to bear arms. and it should be respected. just as the fourth and fifth and sixth amendment should be.
it means that none of us want to take away the hunting rifles that uncle tommy gave you when you're 14 years old. we don't want to do that. nor do we want to take away an arm that he or she needs in a dangerous neighborhood. but the heller decision had a second part. written by a very conservative court majority. it said there is a reasonable limitation on the second amendment. the first amendment, we love it, freedom of speech. but you cannot fire on a crowded theater even though that limits your first amendment ability to speak freely. we have anti-libel laws.
all of those are limitations on the first amendment that are reasonable. well, the limitations supported in senator feinstein's bill are reasonable limitations. we know that there is no inalienable right to own and operate clips for ar-15 assault rifles. that is certainly part of the heller decision. they are not used for self-defense. they are used to maximize the amount of damage that one can do in a short amount of time. the american people know this. if you look at the polls, the american people understand that there is a second amendment and a right to bear arms, and they understand that there should be reasonable limitations on our right to bear.
they are wondering why we are not doing anything to protect them. we saw in the 1990s that even the weekend assault weapons ban that senator feinstein and i passed help save lives. the new and improved bill will help save many more. so let's do everything we can to spare the heartache and loss that we have seen in connecticut and colorado and new york and in less public tragedies around the country. will it be hard? for sure. we owe it to our constituents and our country to try. [applause] >> i would like to join in thanking all of you for being here today on this historic
occasion. a signature moment. this profoundly significant effort to achieve an end to gun violence in our country. my colleague, chris murphy and my state legislators in connecticut and our governor, they have formed a powerful scheme in the effort to reduce gun violence and keep the faith with the people of newtown and connecticut. i particulaparticula particularly would like to thank the law enforcement community. for several decades as a federal prosecutor and as the state attorney general, i have
listened to our police and prosecutors and law enforcement community. i have listened to them in countless forms and numerous tragedies and they have said to me, do something about the guns. they and the assault weapons and prohibit high-capacity magazines. a number of those who came to newtown, connecticut said that we could not have stopped the shooter even with the body armor that we were wearing with that kind of an assault weapon. our law enforcement community was outgunned by criminals and mentally ill people and those who have assault weapons and should be separated from those weapons and from our weapons.
i am listening to them but also the people of newtown. the afternoon that the parents arrived at the sandy hook firehouse. i came there is a public official, but what i saw was through the eyes of parents. and i will never forget the sight and sound of that day as parents emerged from the firehouse learning that their five and six year-old children would not be coming home at night. the swat team members who came from the schoolhouse. they were hit in their guts and hearts by the brutality that they saw. the people of newtown,
connecticut, who said we have to do something about this. and we need to keep faith with them. this would help prevent the newtown, connecticut tragedy. assault weapons, like the one band by this measure, hundreds of thousands of americans would be alive today. the high-capacity magazines would be banned also by this measure. americans and children and educators might be alive today. this measure would ban these kinds of weapons that have been so destructive and brutal in creating violence. it is more stringent than connecticut and it would have
prohibited the type of weapon used at newtown. it has to be seen as one step. part of a comprehensive strategy that should include mental health initiatives, school security, and yes, background checks for all firearms sales. not just by licensed dealers, but at gun shows and background checks for all sales of ammunition. a fugitive, a felon, a gigantic, a domestic abuser can walk into a store and buy a shopping cart full of ammunition, even though he is prohibited from buying it. without any background check, no questions asked, and he can walk out with it. we must change that. newtown is a call to action and real reform.
my hope is that we can seize this moment with a sense of urgency and passion and sustain this momentum. it will be a hard fight ahead. make no mistake. and always remember newtown and its victims. thank you. [applause] >> thank you very much, senator blumenthal. thank you, senator feinstein, are leading this effort. all of my colleagues, new and old, and all the law enforcement families. dick and elizabeth and i were there that day. as the father of the 4-year-old and 1-year-old, there are a lot of moments when i wish i could take back what i saw. the incomprehensible grief that
comes in those first moments of trying to understand what just happened. but make no mistake that the greek than that, that occurred in newtown is not abating. it is multiplying. in a tiny town like that when you take away the lives of 20 kids and six adults, many of which lived in tiny little neighborhoods, horrified children came from one street in that town. the grief continues. let me tell you what's happening today. many of elementary school has moved. a lot of the teachers haven't come back, a lot of the students have not returned. within each one of those classrooms, there is a state board. in one classroom in his monkey. a couple of times every day, a kid yells out the state board
when he gets into a conversation with a fellow student that he doesn't be a part of. a third grader talking about what he saw thought of it, the bodies he stepped over her looks that he caught in the shooter's eye. that does happen today. that's what happens in dealing with one of these mass atrocities. it's not just the families agree. it is that, that washes over these communities in the weeks and months afterwards. children would be alive today if the law that we were proposing today were in place on december december 14, of last year. we know that because the data tells us despite what the gun lobbyists say. at the first assault weapons ban, worked. within nine years, there was a two thirds drop by 7%.
40% of the mass shootings in this country and the history of this country since that ban expired. more kids would be alive today as laws on the books because we know what the numbers tell us. and we also know what happened that day. we know that most of these incidents and when the shooter has to reload. either the gun jams are people have to intervene. in about a 10 minute period of time ,-com,-com ma adam lanza had to reload twice. two times he had to reload. things would've been different if that was nine or 10 or 11. second, i think there is a question as to whether he
would've driven in his mother's car in the first place if he didn't play a video game to give him a false sense of courage of what he could do that day. we know that there will be little girls and boys will be effective for the rest of their lives. gun lobbyists have said this is a feel-good piece of legislation. it would feel really good if allison and charlotte and daniel and olivia and josephine had got to enjoy christmas with her parents are it would feel really good josephine and matalin and catherine and jesse and james and anna were able to go to school this morning. and emily ann jackson and no and carolyn and jessica and all those children.
it would feel really good if parents do not do wake up every morning wondering if their kids were at risk just like those kids in newtown. it's going to be hard and difficult. but to honor those 20 lives, we are going to get it done. thank you very much. [applause] >> i am so proud of the courage of my fellow legislators. would you give them a big round of applause, please? [applause] carolyn mccarthy is such a wonderful person who gave a poignant speech. number cosponsors are going to say a few words.
i have come to know the congressman represents aurora, colorado. hopefully he will tell you a little bit about it and the staunchest of moving forward and then a house member who represents the brave town of newtown, connecticut. >> good morning. i've live in the suburbs of denver, colorado. on one side of my district is columbine high school and the other is aurora, colorado. as you heard some of the senators speaking today and carolyn mccarthy, these mass killings and events affect not just the people killed or wounded or in the case of the
theater shooting in aurora, colorado, that night the whole community was affected. neighborhoods were affected. we have families from tucson and virginia tech and newtown here today. and i would like to read something that was sent to us yesterday by some of the families of the victims. our loved ones were murdered in the colorado theatre on july 20 in 1 of the worst massacres in u.s. history by the exact weapon and high-capacity magazines that senator feinstein is addressing in her proposed legislation today. our loved ones were gunned down in an entire generation of families were taken away in a matter of seconds. we listened to the 9/11 tapes played in court and we sat in agony as we heard 30 shots fired
within 27 seconds, wondering if we'll one of those bullets kill their children. a ar-15 was used in that massacre. in 2012, this nation saw 15 mass shootings. innocent and law-abiding people are dying violently every single day. we should not be a country whose firefighter software bulletproof test to do their job and save lives. what have we become as a nation when our families and friends and even babies are losing their lives just being at school, watching the movie, going to church, shopping for groceries, and buying christmas gifts. our everyday freedoms as americans are being taken away by acts of gun violence.
thank you for working to stop this epidemic of violence. i will end with a quote from martin luther king. our lives begin to end the day we remain silent on things that matter to our future and our lives and our children matter. i will make this letter available to those that would like to see it. it is signed by families of seven of the people that were killed in colorado. this is a tough issue for all of us. there are constitutional implications all of this. but our responsibility as representatives and senators is to be advocates for the people that we represent. i know that the people of the denver area need to see a change. we do not want to trample on second amendment rights. we believe those rights exist.
we have to do something about these mass killings with weapons that the military uses for that law enforcement uses and it is our responsibility. thank you for bringing this forward. thank you. [applause] >> morning. my name is elizabeth and i represent connecticut's fifth district. as a new member of congress that started as a pta mom, this was an unbelievably difficult situation to walk into. i would like to talk about the cost of inaction. rob sibley was in my office the other day and he is a volunteer firefighter. many generations in the small community of sandy hook
elementary. his wife have two children in the sandy hook school. he received a call that morning and someone who had gone to the school to take medication to their son and he got a call saying, there's a man coming towards me with a gun, i love you, and he hung up the phone. that is what the people in newtown are dealing with now. grace macdonald's parents came to the white house last week and they gave a painting by their daughter who loves the color pink. i know my friends and senators, richard blumenthal and chris murphy, join me in this unbelievably sad parade of funerals for six and 7-year-olds. eight of the girls were in girl scout troops. by the boys were in the same boy scout troops. imagine every graduation, every eagle scout ceremony, those
families and all their friends will be grieving. the pain is not over. what i've heard again and again when i have met with families and members of the community, and what i have heard in letters and phone calls and e-mails and around america that we must take meaningful action to save lives. what happened on december 14, 2012 was an unspeakable tragedy. but what happens now, that is up to us or you newtown, connecticut, must be a call to action for congress and for all americans who believe and know that we can respect the rights of law-abiding gun owners and we can save lives at the same time.
because newtown is paying the price of inaction. because communities across this country are you going members of congress have lived this in their district. those who have paid and are paying the price of political inaction. we can no longer sit by and let the loss of precious schoolchildren, six and 7-year-olds and courageous educators go unanswered. we cannot let them be cut down every day by violence. it is time to enact and renew and strengthen the assault weapons ban. the time is now. i am so proud to join with
congress in the house of representatives and i would like to thank my friends and colleagues, my friend from connecticut. also senator feinstein and senator schumer and dick durbin for their leadership. make no mistake, it is america's battle. an incredibly boring question was asked. he said what does it take? what does it take for us as a nation to act? i hope and i pray and i believe that this little town of newtown, connecticut, that it will be our wake-up call and call to act or it to act now. to save lives or it thank you.
[applause] >> i like to now introduce to great public servants are you i have been privileged to be a mayor and to be part of the united states coalition of mayors for nine years. the great mayor of the city of philadelphia is here. he is the chairman of the united states conference of mayors which has endorsed this legislation and i will be calling upon him in a moment. we also had the philadelphia police commissioner charles ramsey, who is president of the cheap association which endorses this legislation i would like to call on both of these distinguished gentlemen to come forward.
>> good afternoon. thank you, senator feinstein, and members of the house and the senate. we are honored that the congressman has joined us and all who have assembled. again and again, americans have been stunned by senseless violence and acts involving assault weapons and large capacity magazines. columbine was in april of 1999. thirteen people were murdered. virginia tech was april 2007 or it tucson was january 2011. the people murdered. twelve wounded, including gabrielle giffords. aurora, colorado, july of 2012. twelve murdered. oak creek was august of 2012,
six murdered. on december 14, 2012, tragedy struck again, killing 20 children and six educators at newtown, connecticut. in fact that still remains incomprehensible to all of us. too many times during the last few years mayors have expressed shock at mass shootings, even more frequently, many of us must cope with gun violence that occurs on the streets of our cities day after day after day. weapons of mass destructidestructi destruction or destroying our communities in streets and our families. i was sworn in in january 2008 during my first term. on may 3, 2008, philadelphia police officer was killed with an ak-47.
tell his wife, michelle, and their children by any civilian needs one of those weapons to be out on the streets of our cities. tell any mother or father or sister or brother or niece or nephew by their family member is no longer with us. because of those kinds of weapons, handguns that are high-capacity magazines. why would anyone need one of those? 's death and destruction must and right now. every day in america, 282 people are shocked. eighty-six of those people died. thirty-two of those people are murdered. every day 50 children are shot and eight of them died, including five who are murdered. this must stop.
legislation senator feinstein and others will help to end the insanity. i am here to register the strong support of the u.s. conference of mayors for the assault weapons ban 2013. we commit as an organization hundreds of mayors all across america, we are committed to doing everything necessary to ensure this legislation becomes a law. i have available for you today a letter originally sent three days after the newtown tragedy occurred. now it is signed by 210 mayors all across the country which calls upon the congress to make reasonable changes to our gun laws and regulations.
listed first was a recommendation for the enactment of legislation to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines that has now been presented by senator dianne feinstein and others. when she discusses bill and her commitment to pakistan, senator feinstein described herself as a mayor on a mission. senator feinstein, you had an array of current mayors on a mission spinning with you, ready to do whatever is necessary to make sure this bill becomes a law. let's move forward. thank you. [applause] good afternoon, everyone.
thank you very much, senator feinstein. thank you to the colleagues in the senate and the members that are here today in support of this legislation. i'm speaking today on behalf of the major city chiefs cities chiefs association. we are an organization made up of the 63 largest cities in the united states and i have the honor of serving as president of the organization on my way down here, i was on the train i received a call from the executive director of the international association of chiefs of police, which is the largest of all the police organization. unfortunately they could not be here today, but they wanted me to pass on to you their support in this legislation.
members and executives, my good friends and chair of the national prevention for gun violence, thank you for being here as well. i'm here to also speak for myself. i've been in law enforcement for more than 40 years and i have spent 40 years in that department. i have spent nine years as the police a police chief in washington dc and for the last five years i have spent a lot of time in philadelphia and have seen a lot of violence over that time. but nothing compares to the devastation caused by assault weapons. i was doing an interview not too long ago with one of our local
news stations. we just had a homicide in philadelphia. it was a particularly gruesome scene with multiple shell casings. i asked him when he only saw one shell casing on the ground and he could not remember. and i cannot remember. i don't think people really understand the firepower that's out there on the street. what our citizens have to face everyday. i don't claim to be an expert in the workings of firearms, but i am an expert in terms of the continent they cause on the streets. for those weapons i want to single out because they are the actual weapons that were used.
a military style assault weapon, the ar-15. that is in the center there of the middle panel. the 33 brown extended magazine, similar to the one used in tucson, arizona. in which congresswoman gabrielle giffords was shot in six people were murdered. that is also in the center display. smith & wesson mp 15 used in aurora colorado when people were shot dead at the very top. and of course, the assault pistol used in the san francisco shooting in which eight people were dead and of course, one of the more commonly seen firearms.
just wouldn't expect something like this to take place. if the slaughter of twenty babies was not capture your attention, then i give up. because i don't know what else will. -- that won't do anything. this is just the start, folks. look at this, and tell me why any of this needs to be on the streets of our city. if you can tell me that,ly listen to you. guess what? i don't think any of you can. because there's absolutely no reason they weren't meant to be in philadelphia, newtown, connecticut; aurora, colorado it's not what it's for. they weren't made for that. how are we going to go hunting with something like that that? we listen to the arguments and
say it will prevent. i've been in the business for more than fort years. you don't know what you prevent. we deal with what we county prevent, for the most part. i also believe that we make a difference. at the laws we have on the books in the country make a difference. if something is simple as a safety lock has been on that weapon used in newtown, we probably would not be here today talking about the murder of all of those children. why? because the shooter wouldn't have access to that firearm. we can't get simple legislation passed to have guns, lost or stolen, make sure you have safety locks. come on, we're not trying to seize everybody's guns. we need reasonable gun control in this country. or guess what? it will happen again. [applause]
thank you all. thank you all for being here. this is just a start. we have to remain vigilant and we have to pay attention to what is going on. the organizations that i represent pledge our full support, and we will do anything we can to help you see this through. thank you. [applause] >> because we're in the hall of congress, i think it's easy to forget the very real human faith of gun violence. and so we have asked a few victims to come forward and they will introduce themselves. they will tell you what happened to them very briefly. and i hope you will go away say -- seeing how human an issue this is. how wrenching -- it is to families and how america needs to stand up and end it.
would you all please come forward in one right after the another? here. sorry. hello. my name is lori. on the morning of april 16, 2007, i received a phone call from my daughter, emily, and she said, mommy, i've been shot. we learned subsequent to that that the shooter his weapon was equipped with a high capacity magazine. and was able to do great, great carnage that day. our family fully supports the assault weapons ban of 2013. thank you, everyone here. [applause]
i had name is pam simon. standing with me is professor bruce simon. i was on the staff of gabrielle giffords on the morning of january 8th, 2011, i was standing a few feet from the congresswoman when i was shot in the chest and in the arm. on that day, thirty bullets were delivered in less than thirty-second. killing six including my staff member and dear friend gab zimmerman, and wounding thirteen others including one of your own, congresswoman gabrielle giffords. we fully support this legislation. thank you so much. [applause] my name is colin goddard. i'm one of the survivors from the shooting at virginia tech in 2007. i was shot above my left knee in both hips and through my right
shoulder. i carry three of those four bullets with me now for the rest of my life. i'm on behalf of the 32 people that didn't make it that way. and 23 americans, and 32 of us by guns every single day. [applause] >> my name is -- my sister folded me to virginia tech just after i graduated. she was an 18-year-old freshman 4.0 student and had her life ahead of her. over fifty people were killed in a matter of minutes at virginia tech that morning. the gunman had thirty rounds magazine clips multiple that he was able to purchase over the internet. it devastated my family. we support this legislation and we know that many, many other americans who have been through this and support it as well. thank you, senators and representatives. [applause]
>> my name is -- i was -- [inaudible] survivor in the german -- sorry. thank you. i was injured in the german in virginia tech. i have a bullet still in my head. i was shot in the jaw. it's one inch drn one millimeter away from my brain ceil. it's still there. i was shot in my wrist. i suffered so much pain and i'm still under going my medical process. it's going to be a long-term care. my family had suffered just like the other 32 families that suffered, the fellow survivors, our friends, our loved ones, our community. sandy hook elementary school is a wake-up call and we need support sensible legislation on gun safety such as this. thank you, senator